Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!bu-cs!cloud9!banyan!gil
From: gil@banyan.UUCP (Gil Pilz@Eng@Banyan)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: .aquaria
Keywords: the decline of the Brahms gang - the final days
Message-ID: <567@banyan.UUCP>
Date: 30 Oct 89 18:24:41 GMT
References: <21442@gryphon.COM> <1989Oct26.044435.23101@agate.berkeley.edu> <21567@gryphon.COM> <6712@ficc.uu.net>
Reply-To: gil@banyan.com
Organization: Banyan Systems, Inc.
Lines: 28

In article <6712@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <21567@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>> Now, if the question raised by the poll had been ``which hierarchy do you 
>> think the group belongs in'' then ``sci'' lost, but I cannot
>> see any interpretation which indicates sci.aquaria lost.

>Since that's what this whole bloody debate is over, I can't see what other
>possible interpretation you could possibly give the results. Unless, of
>course, you've got this heavy ego problem putting a really twisted spin on
>things. 

Bingo. After you've invested as many ego points on the game as Richard
has it becomes almost impossible to quit. Why do you think it took so
long to get us out of Vietnam (or the Russian's Afghanistan) ?  It's
simply 'betting into a losing hand' (I hope it's a losing hand).

Actually, though I disagree with Richard and co. I'm begining to
admire their all-out, gonzo aproach to this thing. Anything worth
doing is worth over-doing and all that . . more fun than the whole
comp.eniac.tcp-ip flap.

I think the rest of you would have more fun if you wised up to the
fact that this argument no longer has anything to do with anything,
having become purely a political battle of wills.  The field is big,
the rules are loose, there are no referee's . . all we need is some
beer.

gil@banyan.com